Carlton v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that order is final where context of order makes clear that dismissal is without prejudice to file new action
• holding that the dismissal of an action “without prejudice” is final when “the intent of the order is to bring to an end the judicial labor in the action”
• holding that an order dismissing a complaint without prejudice is not considered final unless it is clear that the dismissal is intended to be without prejudice to initiate another separate action
• holding that an order dismissing a civil case without prejudice on the ground that the plaintiff failed to make timely service of process is ap-pealable as a final order because it is a final disposition of the case pending before the court
• holding dismissal without prejudice to raise issues in a separate future action is final
• stating that excusable neglect usually requires more than “simple inadvertence or mistake of counsel or ignorance of the rules” (quoting Winters v. Teledyne Movible Offshore, Inc., 776 F.2d 1304, 1306 (5th Cir.1985))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).